) 16 


[ 


3 


\ 


F6 


'Opy 


1 

1 



Columbia Unitoerfi^ttp 

in ttje Citp of JI3etti gotk 



DEPARTMENT OF HISTORY 



THE HISTORICAL ESSAY 

and , 

THE CRITICAL REVIEW 



Some suggestions as to their preparation, 

with examples taken from 

American history 



B:y 

DIXON RYAN FOX, Ph.D. 

Assistant Professor of History 

Columbia University 

New York City 



These directions were originally intended for home 
students, but those working in residence at the Univer- 
sity can, it is thought, find something of value in them. 



©CIA6 5G581 

Copyright 1921, University Extension, Columbia University, New York, N. Y. 

FEB -4 1922 



^ 



\^ 



The Historical Essay 



C ^ 



He toiled in the archives, hunting the little fact that makes the difference. 

— Professor Maitland writing of Lord Acton. 

An historical essay of from twenty-five hundred to six thousand words 
upon some topic selected from within a certain period or field of American 
history will be required of the student as a part of the term's work. It is 
to be based upon serious, systematic and extended investigation, and its 
preparation constitutes not only the most important exercise of this course 
of study but one of the most valuable experiences in the student's entire 
education. The method presently to be outlined is in general the method 
by which a lawyer prepares a brief, a minister a sermon or an author a 
book; an engineer, an advertising agent or a business expert working out 
a memorandum for his clients would, in part, follow a similar procedure. 
As one sets out upon this enterprise, therefore, it should be understood 
that here may be acquired a technique of inquiry which will be serviceable 
wherever one essays to learn the substantial truth of any matter, and a 
technique which the world will value and will even pay for. But most 
important is the understanding thus developed that the whole truth is not 
contained in any texbook or in any single work though it reach to several 
volumes. The reader finds the use and opportunity of a library, with its 
indexes, encyclopedias and bibliographic aids; he learns how to pick out 
from each book, pamphlet, report or newspaper the few small parts which 
bear upon his subjects; he develops the power to judge between conflicting 
statements and to compare the credibility of different sources. The self- 
respect that comes from thoroughness will in the end be his. 

At the proper time and after due reflection on the course as far as he 
has covered it, each student is asked to express his preference for a par- 
ticular subject,^ submitting several titles as suggestions, but definite as- 
signment is obtained by individual arrangement with the instructor. As 
soon as the student receives his assignment he will make a list of all the 
major works upon the subject. By consulting the card catalogue of as 
many libraries as are available he will ascertain what books are entered 
under his title, though it is unlikely that he will, by this means alone, be 
able to prepare a very long list, or learn much about the relative value of 
books. Similarly he will consult Channing, Hart and Turner's Guide to 
the Study and Reading of American History, an excellent manual with 
references to general and special works; C. K. Adams' Manual of Histor- 



1 Before selecting a subject please inform the instructor as to your library 
facilities. How near are you to a public library or other considerable collection 
of books? Has the library the principal standard works on American history? 
A set of the Congressional Debates, etc.? Any newspaper files? Any special 
collections of interest to the historian? Make yourself a force in your community 
for the maintenance of a good library. 

[1] 



leal Literature : the American Library Association's Literature of Amer- 
ican History, with its supplement, which arranges works by periods and 
contains critical estimates of those mentioned; the Book Review Digest 
and the Cumulative Index; and the bibliographical essays at the end of 
each volume of the American Nation Series, the desired volume being 
found, if necessary, by consulting the general index under the topic 
studied. By using the index the student will receive much help from 
T. L. Bradford's Bihliographer's Manual of American History (5 volumes, 
revision of 1910), and, if he is patient and persistent, from Joseph 
Sabin's Dictionary of Books relating to America. The elaborate 
bibliographies in Justin Winsor's Narrative and Critical His- 
tory of America are useful for the earlier part of American 
history, especially in their references to available source material; the 
Cambridge Modern History, Vol. VII, pp. 753-834, contains book lists for 
the periods of United States history, although unfortunately it includes 
no descriptive comment; the bibliographies at the end of each chapter in 
Bassett's Short History of the United States, Max Farrand's Development 
of the United States, the Riverside History of the United States, etc., refer 
to many modern special treatises. Poole's Index, the Reader's Guide to 
Periodical Literature, and the Annual Library Index are useful for 
articles in periodicals; the bibliographies at the end of articles in the en- 
cyclopedias will often help, especially if one consults the general index 
for related topics. Appleton's and the National Cyclopedia op American 
Biography, under the names of the principal persons important in rela- 
tion to the subject, will suggest some titles, while McLaughlin and Hart's 
Cyclopedia of American Government and Lalor's Cyclopedia of Political 
Science, will be of service. For material published since 1902, the student 
should consult the Writings of American History edited by G. C. GrifBn 
and others. A. P. C. GrifRn has compiled a Bibliography of American His- 
torical Societies and an Index of Articles upon American Local History. 
This array of bibliographical titles may seem sufficiently formidable, but 
if a student has access to one of the larger libraries, the curator will sug- 
gest other aids, for example in the use of public documents. Although, 
other things being equal, the more books available, the better the essay, 
no one should feel disheartened if not all the facilities here suggested can 
be obtained. The standard works like those of McMaster, Von Hoist, Os- 
good, Schouler, Channing, Adams, Rhodes, Hildreth, The American Nation 
Se7-ies, etc., are usually to be had and generally a respectable number of 
biographies and special topical studies. 

By all these aids the student will be enabled to gather a large number 
of titles of books dealing in whole or in part with his subject — perhaps 
thirty or forty. Each such title should be entered clearly in ink upon a 
separate card, together with the name of the author, the place and date 
of publication, a comment based upon a bibliographer's estimate (if any 
is found in some of the works mentioned above), upon some review ap- 
pearing soon after the book's publication, or upon the student's own 
examination of the book, and some indication of the portion of it 
dealing directly with his subject. 

[2J 



Supposing, for example, that the student has chosen the "Missouri Com- 
promise" as his subject, one of his cards will appear as follows: 



Lucien Carr, 

Missouri: a Bone of Contention [American Commonwealth 
Series] (Boston, 1899), chapters vii-ix. 

50 pages devoted to subject, generally in a judicial style, 
though apparently somewhat resentful of anti-slavery inter- 
ference. 



The cards are noio to be submitted to the instructor- for his examination 
and advice, a part of the titles possibly being set aside as negligible, under 
the circumstances, a part indicated indispensable and a part recom- 
mended to be used as supplementary, if time admits. It may be that 
some books that have not been mentioned will occur to the instructor 
and he will suggest that these be sought. 

The student should now read through the account recommended for 
the purpose, to get a broad view of the subject, and then prepare an outline 
according to the treatment which, in the light of his preliminary infor- 
mation, seems to be best. The following, by no means recommended as 
perfect or complete, is offered merely as a simple suggestion as to pro- 
cedure : 

I. Historical Background. 

1. Early settlement and development of Missouri. 

a. Origin of population. 

b. Number and distribution. 

2. Slavery in Missouri Territory. 

a. Extent of slavery. Geographical basis of plantation economy. 
b Territorial law on slavery. 

3. Application for admission as a state. 

[3] 



II. Missouri question in 15th Congress. 

1. Balanced condition of the Union. 

2. Changing southern view of slavery 

3. Tallmadge's amendment. 

a. Influences supporting. 

b. Arguments for. Moral. Constitutional. 

c. Influences opposing. 

d. Arguments against. Moral. Constitutional (e. g., provision in Louisi- 
ana treaty of equality of new states with old). 

4. Fate of Tallmadge s amendment. 

5. Public sentiment in the various sections. 

III. Missouri Question in 16th Congress. 

1. Differences in proportional strength of sections. 

2. Application of Maine. 

a. Relation to Massachusetts. 

3. Proposal to join the two bills. 

a. Roberts' amendment. 

i. Discussion on the merits of slavery. Pinkney vs. King. 

b. Burrill s amendment. 

c. Thomas' amendment. 

d. The committee of conference. 

4. The Compromise of 1820. 

a. Final debate and comment. John Randolph and the Compromise. 

b. The bill passed. 

IV. After the First Compromise. 

1. Popular response. 

a.. Comment of individuals and press in different sections. 
b. Apparent effect upon the anti-slavery movement. 

2. The constitutional convention in Missouri. 

a. Expression of delegates' opinion on the compromise. 

b. Treatment of the free-negro question. 

3. Congressional specification as to free-negro question (called "The Second 
Missouri Compromise"). 

a. Constitutionality of this procedure. 

b. Action of Missouri. 

4. The electoral count (a third compromise), 
a. Opinion as to its propriety. 

V. Effect of the Compromise. 

1. Supposed finality. 

2. New questions. 

3. Discontent of south. 

4. Violation of the compromise. 



With his outline before him the student now begins to take notes. 
Ihese should be written neatly, in ink, on one side of papers (which are 
much cheaper than cards) preferably about 5V2 in. x S% in., running 
lengthwise of the page, liberal margins being left at the sides, and an 
entry being made at the top of each paper as to particular sub-topic de- 
veloped dy the notes on that sheet, and book and page references for each 
item put in the margin. Each }mper, then, is like a pigeon-hole into 
which is placed all the matter coming under one sub-head of the outline, 
as it is gleaned from different sources. In a more extensive essay it would 
doubtless be advantageous to give a separate sheet of paper for each note, 
properly labelling each, of course, according to the outline scheme, but in 
a work of the size here contemplated probably the be.st method is to read 
through one account at a time distributing the items of fact or comment 

[4] 



each to its appropriate paper, modifying the outline — possibly to the ex- 
tent of complete rearrangement — and consequently his note-sheets, as ex- 
perience may suggest. 

For example, on beginning the narrative of the compromise in Carr's 
Missouri, the reader finds an account of the number of free and slave 
states immediately before 1820. He, of course, puts this on his paper 
marked "Balanced condition of the Union"; (if his outline did not happen 
to contain this sub-topic, he would now supply the omission). This paper 
would then look something like this: 



Balanced condition of the Union 

Carr Mississippi's admission, 1817, made 10 slave and 10 

Missouri free. 111., Dec. 1818; Ala., Dec. 1819; balance kept 

p. 139 without stipulations imposed. Mo. applies for admis- 

sion (as slave state). 



If in some other book there is found something more upon the "Balanced 
condition of the Union", it will naturally be recorded, with its reference 
citation, on this same paper. If there are a number of notes on this sub- 
topic another paper similarly headed will be used. On page 142 of Carr's 
book there is a discussion of arguments against the Tallmadge amend- 
ment; on page 143, arguments in favor; on page 147, observations on viola- 
tion of the compromise. All these will be recorded on their appropriate 
papers, the notes on these sub-topics to be supplemented from other books. 
Sometimes an extract, especially a quotation from a contemporary, is 
better directly transcribed in full than abstracted. 
At the end a single paper may look thus: 

[5] 



John Randolph and the Ooini)romise. 

McMaster, Wlien in com. of conference 18 northerners changed to 

Vol. V vote vs. restriction, R. calls them "dough-faces", a 

p. 591 name used for 40 yrs. to denote northern men with 

southern principles. 

Morning after compromise passed R. moved recon- 
sideration while bill still in Speaker Clay s hands. 
Declared out of order while morning s business un- 
settled. Clay, alarmed, sent bill post-haste to Senate 
and said no jurisdiction. 



Annals of 

Congrc;<s 
1819-1821 
pp. 1588- 
1590 



Hildreth, 
VI. 691 
et seq. 

H. Adams 
Randolph. 
pp. 272- 
274 



R. never forgave Clay for this trickery. 



J. Q. Adams 

Memoirs, 

V, 4. 

same, V. 277 "Floyd and Randolph were for bringing Missouri into 
the Union by storm, by bullying a majority into a 
minority." 



R. calls com)), a "dirty bargain '. 



R. though claiming to detest slavery believed in self- 
determination for states and hated Clay who bent all 
to nationalism. (See notes on Clay.) 



Sometimes the student will find he has put an item under a heading less 
appropriate than some other; by the use of scissors, pins and paste-pot 
he may easily transfer it to its proper place. After all this work has 
been done, he will arrange his papers in the order he intends to follow 
in writing, and subrait the notes to the instructor for criticism. 

When the notes are returned the student has before him the material 
for his essay, and it will not be found difficult to write when he so obvious- 
ly has something to say. But to write well is nearly always difficult. In 
general, it will be agreed, the essay should stick to facts; it should be 
based upon the notes. However, the writer should make his facts his 
own, relate them one to another through his understanding of the ten- 
dencies at work in thoi^e times whose story he is telling, and should write 
his narrative with the spirit and coherence of his own style. Of course, 
it may occasionally be advisable to use the exact Avords of a book or 
article, in which case quotation marks should indicate the precise extent 
of the direct quotation. Taking for data our notes on "John Randolph 
and the Constitution", we may imagine ourselves constructing a narrative 
something like this: 



[6] 



This first great legislative battle in the contest for the western 
territories had revealed the character of the warring forces and 
their leaders. Those with Rufus King stood firmly for free soil 
in all the future states ; those with Pinkney crusaded for the gen- 
eral spread of slavery as a blessing; John Randolph, while claim- 
ing to detest that institution, maintained the right of self determi- 
nation and control for every state as guaranteed by the Constitu- 
tion ; Henry Clay presented an ideal which he claimed worth the 
sacrifice of all these principles, the solidarity of the nation achieved 
through compromise, and apparently he had prevailed/ Ran- 
dolph, in particular, hated Clay and this unjust exaltation of the 
nation at the cost of states." Those northerners who were con- 
verted by this compromiser's arguments he stigmatized as "dough 
faces", a name of derision and contempt which for forty years 
was fastened upon "northern men with southern principles".^ It 
was a "dirty bargain" that these nationalists had made,* and 
should be. reconsidered before it was too late. 

On the morning following the final vote, while the bill lay on 
the Speaker's desk unsigned, Randolph rose and desired to move 
this reconsideration so that all restrictions might be stricken from 
it. In alarm Clay ruled him out of order and declared that the 
morning's business as set down upon the calendar must be consid- 
ered first. But, in the course of this routine, while Randolph 
waited for his opportunity, the Speaker signed and sent the bill 
post-haste to the Senate. When at last the cjuestion came, he 
answered that the matter was no longer within the jurisdiction of 
the House. '^ This sharp practice John Randolph could never for- 
get or forgive.'' It had finally frustrated his plan to bring Mis- 
souri in by storm regardless of all opposition.'^ 

1 Supra, pp. 14, 17, 18. Cf. C. Schurz, op.cit. pp. 172-182. 

■2. Henry Adams, John Randolph, pp. 272-274. 

3 J. B. McMaster, History of the People of the United States, Vol. V, p. 591. 

4 Richard Hildreth, History of the United States, Vol. pp. 691 et seq. 

5 A7inals of Congress, 1819-1821, pp. 1588-1590. 
<i J. Q. Adams, Memoirs, Vol. V, p. 4. 

7 Ihid., Vol. V, p. 277. The comment is in Adams' acrid humor: "Floyd 
and Randolph were for bringing Missouri into the Union by storm, by bully- 
ing a majority into a minority". 

(20) 
_ 



lu this sample of narrative it will be noticed that the second sentence 
refers to matters which we suppose to have been developed earlier in the 
paper, say on pages 14, 17 and 18; consequently we refer to those pages as 
"above", using, according to custom, the Latin word supra, which because 
it is from a foreign language is Italicized; if we were asking the reader 
to compare this statement with something to be found later, on page 24. 
we would use the word i7ifra. It seems well also to refer the reader to 
Carl Schurz's Henry Clay where that statesman's views on nationalism are 
more fully developed. Inasmuch as we desire, or at least suggest to the 
reader to compare what is here said with what Schurz says, we write c/., 
which stands for the Latin word confer, meaning compare. But it is sup- 
posed that previously in the paper there have been references 
to this work, so that we say op. cit., which is the abbreviation of opere 
citate, or "in the work cited". When, however the citation is to the same 
work as immediately before on the same page, as is the case in note seven, 
we use the expression ibid., which is an abbreviation for the Latin word 
ihidem meaning "in the same place". In our reference to Hildreth we 
cite Page 691 and those immediately following as et seq., which stands 
for et sequentes, having that significance. If we referred to material 
scattered through a book, we would write after the title the word passim, 
a verb form meaning "scattered about". When we mention for a second 
time an article found in a reference book or some other collection, we 
may give the name of the particular author and the general work 
and then write loc. cit., for loco citato, "in the place cited". Errors in 
spelling or obvious absurd mistakes in the source or author quoted should 
be transcribed if you make a direct quotation, though immediately fol- 
lowed by the Latin word sic in parenthesis indicating that the original 
is "thus". At first it may appear that such devices are pedantic and 
that English words would do quite as well, but they are the standard 
expressions of scholarship and any departure from them would probably 
make for confusion rather than clearness. 

But, it will be asked, why have footnotes at all? Do they not destroy 
the symmetry of the page, distract attention from the body of the narra- 
tive, and give the reader an uncomfortable feeling that the author takes 
the opportunity to display his erudition? Certainly these questions de- 
serve a patient answer, for footnotes are not mere irritating nuisances 
tolerated by reason of tradition, nor are they generally set forth to grati- 
fy the writer's vanity. In the first place, in the footnotes may be given 
direct quotations or other information or critical statements which for 
some reason do not seem to fit well into the text, as is illustrated in our 
footnote seven. Secondly, they furnish bibliographical aid to the reader; 
if anything in the text so arouses his interest that he would seek more 
knowledge on that matter, the corresponding note, in pointing out the 
source on which the stated fact or judgment has been based, suggests 
that there, perhaps, may be found more information of a similar kind. 
As H. H. Bancroft once remarked, writing on this subject in his Literary 
Industries, "The historian should leave the ladder by which he has 
climbed". Thirdly, the self-imposed obligation to cite his authorities pro- 

[8] 



vides an excellent discipline for the writer himself, saving him very prob- 
ably from hasty generalizations and statements that he could not prove. 
Blaine's Tioenty Years of Congress is a work of considerable value, but 
must be read with constant caution because of the author's carelessness as 
to particular facts and summary judgments. "If Blaine", observes the 
historian Rhodes^ "had felt the necessity of giving authorities in a foot- 
note for every statement about which there might have been a question, he 
certainly would have written an entirely different sort of a book." 

The footnotes, too, enable the well informed reader more intelligently 
to judge the credibility of the narrative. If the citation is to a notoriously 
unreliable authority, the statement will be taken as tinged with the 
partisanship or other inaccuracy which is known to characterize the orig- 
inal. The opportunities which the author cited has enjoyed as to gaining 
knowledge of the event, of course make his testimony more or less valu- 
able as the case may be. This introduces the very important question 
as to what are sources in history and how they may differ in value. 

A primary or original source is the record or testimony of one who had 
personal knowledge of the event, person, place or object described; or it 
may be an object itself which has been made by man, such as a pyramid 
in Egypt, or which has conditioned man's effort, such as the battle-field of 
Gettysburg. We are, of course, chiefly dependent on written testimony. 
An original source is the work of a contemporary, though that in itself 
is not enough, e.g., the testimony of DeWitt Clinton who was governor of 
New York in 1820 would not be a good source on the transactions of the 
conference committee on the Missouri Compromise in Washington, though 
it might have great value as a source on the state of public opinion in 
New York on the compromise. We must remember that in one sentence 
or paragraph a writing may be an original source and in another sen- 
tence on the same page not an original source. On our specimen page two 
original sources are cited. The Aniials of Congress are made up of steno- 
graphic reports taken on the spot and constitute what is probably a reli- 
able record, as far as it goes, of what Randolph and Clay said and did in 
the Senate on Tuesday, March 2, 1820. John Quincy Adams as Secretary 
of State was closely in touch with affairs, and he might be expected to 
know the opinions of Randolph; later in association with Clay he, too, had 
to feel the lash of Randolph's tongue. His observations were jotted down 
each night #ith slight revision, and hence have much greater value than 
would reminiscences written by a man in old age, when his recollection 
would be vague and pieced out by recourse to historical material as avail- 
able for the historian today as it was for him. However, Adams was a man 
of strong prejudices and it would be better if we had more testimony on 
these points to add to his; indeed, a historical fact can hardly be said to be 
established until we have an agreement of at least two competent wit- 
nesses. It is obvious, also, that were Adams always cool and judicial he 
would yet not be the very best authority on Randolph's opinion. Would it 
not be more satisfactory if in the manscript letters of Randolph, such as 



1 American Historical Association Report, 1900, Vol. I, p. 56. 

[9] 



those preserved in the Library of Congress, we might find his own state- 
ment on this matter? Even then it would affect its reliability if it were 
made to a sympathetic friend like Governor Nicholson or to some con- 
stituent, personally unknown, who had solicited a statement, or if it were 
made the morning befoi-e his duel with Clay in 1826, or in 1831 when he 
is reported to have been "weakened by age, excesses and disease." Thus 
even an "original source" may have greater or less value according to the 
circumstances. 

Generally speaking, such a source when available is better than the nar- 
rative or comment even of such reputable writers as Carl Schurz, Henry 
Adams, McMaster or Hildreth, but practically such secondary material 
must, very often be employed in in historical composition. One must only 
keep in mind that other things being equal, the value of a narrative is in 
direct ratio to its nearness to the original source. A fresh illustration 
may suffice to show this truth. 

Suppose that among the archives of Connecticut there is the clerk's 
manuscript of a militia lav/ passed in 1670 requiring a quarterly muster 
and training of all able-bodied men, and that soon after enactment the law 
was printed. An historian of Connecticut is sufficiently impressed as he 
reads this old volume to give a page and a half of the law. A special stu- 
dent preparing a monograph on defense in the colonial period consults 
this history of Connecticut and devotes perhaps a page to this measure of 
1670. A scholar writing a great "monumental" work on the colonies 
makes mention of the law as he finds it described in this monograph. 
Professor ,A. in putting together his textbook reads among other things 
this standard work on colonial history and gives a few lines to Connecti- 
cut's milita as it was organized about the time of King Philip's War. A 
journalist, writing an article on universal military service, remembers 
the passage in Professor A's book and includes what he can recall of the 
features of the law. The Honorable B. C. D. in addressing his constituents 
on the Fourth of July with respect to the obligations of citizenship makes 
a reference to this article he has recently read in a popular magazine, 
which sets forth how the fathers of New England looked upon duty of all 
men to fight for their country. The speech is printed in the local paper 
and the law is disfcussed by Colonel E. at breakfast next morning. Mrs. 
E., who listens to the Colonel, is thus ten degrees removed from the orig- 
inal source and the liability of error in her statement to the Women's 
Club on this subject is very great. 

But, of course, history need not be presented in strict progression ac- 
cording to the clock and calendar of time. As he synthesizes the data in 
his mind the author may conclude to abandon the chronological arrange- 
ment and treat his subject by topics, for it is possible to write in this man- 
ner history, or even biography, as has been done so admirably by P. L. 
Ford in his Many- Sided Franklin and True George Washington, and in 
Gamaliel Bradford's Lee. It would be possible therefore for us entirely 
to recast our outline as follows: » 

[10] 



I National enthusiasm for western settlement. 

1. Circumstances of settlement. 

2. References in contemporary literature. 

3. References in the compromise debate. 

II State and federal relations as discussed in the debate. 

III American Parliamentary practice as exhibited in the debate. 

IV Arguments for slavery about 1S20. 

V Arguments against slavery about 1820. 
VI The free negro and citizenship as discussed in the debate. 
VII The expediency of compromise in our federal system as discussed 
in the debate. 



Some subjects might thus be presented with superior convenience and 
clarity; but, in the purely topical method of synthesis, there is lost the 
sense of continuity and integration which are characteristics of social as 
well as other life. 

Would it not be better to combine the advantages of the two methods 
by pausing here and there in the general chronologial account to treat 
in topical expansion the controlling tendency or the theme which seems 
dominant in the thought of the particular day or time which has been 
reached? For example, when we get to 111,3, in our chronological out- 
line, we might decide that this is an appropriate place to discuss, for a 
little space, the idea of compromise as operative in previous American 
history — in the great constitutional convention, legislative contests on 
the tariff, etc. — just as a general summary of the contemporary views on 
slavery which were revealed throughout the discussion and which we have 
indicated in our topical scheme under items IV and V might well be set 
forth in connection with the famous speeches of Pinkney and King men- 
tioned as III, 3, b, in our first outline. 

In his little book on The Writing of History (New Haven, 1920, pp. 
141-142), Professor F. M. Fling gives a clear succinct direction as to how 
one may include topical expansions in a chronological narrative: "Fol- 
low one series as long as it occupies the center of the stage, allowing the 
other series to drop out of sight. When the interest shifts to another 
series, drop the first, but before following the new series from the point 
where it impinges on the old, pick up as many of the back threads of the 
new series as may be necessary for the understanding of what is to follow." 

When the completed essay is submitted it should be accompanied by the 
outline and a bibliography. In the preparation of the last the various ma- 
terials should be classified as "Primary Sources" and "Other Sources" using 
the word source in its broadest sense. Under the former heading one 
should put into separate groups manuscripts, public documents, news- 
papers, contemporary printed accounts including pamphlets, memoirs and 
autobiographies, etc. In the second class should come general histories, 
local histories, monographs, biographies, etc. Our previous discussion of 
sources should make clear this scheme of classification. To give one more 

[11] 



example: if the career of Martin Van Buren were under examination, 
George Bancroft's biography written in the forties would be a primary 
source, because of the personal acquaintance of the author with the sub- 
ject, while Edward Morse Shepard's Life, published in 188S, though a 
far more useful work, would not. With the complete citation of each book 
taken from your cards should go your comment on its value based on your 
own experience. Thus the bibliography becomes an important part of 
your contribution, resulting as it does from thoughtful and intelligent in- 
vestigation and criticism. 

In conclusion we may say that the essay should demonstrate the writer's 
ability to combine and digest information derived from a number of 
sources, and the final product should represent a work as original as that 
of a poet or a builder. Sentences should be rewritten until they satisfy in 
meaning and in sound, until the author has the feeling of the artist, that 
he lacks no word and no word can be spared, for scholarship and artistry, 
truth and power, are complementary in the great achievements of his- 
torians. The effectiveness of presentation will be carefully considered in 
the critic's judgment, and a paper is as likely to be sent back with a 
mark of "flossy", "annalistic" or "disjointed", as it is to be condemned as 
"thin in substance" or "conclusions unwarranted by the facts". 



[12] 



The Critical Review 

The critic is not a base caviler, but the younger brother of genius. Next to 
invention is the power of interpreting invention ; next to beauty the power of 
appreciating beauty. — Margaret Fuller. 

Several times during the year the student will be called upon to prepare " 
a paper on some historical book. If one is going to pass an honest judg- 
ment on a work it is clear that the first duty is carefully and thoroughly 
to read it, taking note of its important features. The author may expect 
this consideration from the reviewer, for a book is the fruit of toil and 
thought. The great Petrarch, in speaking of his letters, puts the author's 
case: "I desire", he says, "that my reader, whoever he may be, should 
think of me alone, not of his daughter's wedding, his mistress's embraces, 
the wiles of his enemy, his engagements, horse, lands or money. I want 
him to pay attention to me. If his affairs are pressing, let him postpone 
reading the letter, but when he does read, let him throw aside the burden 
of business and family cares, and fix his mind upon the matter before 
him. I do not wish him to carry on his business and attend to my letter 
at the same time. I will not have him gain without any exertion what has 
not been produced without labor on my part." 

After careful reading, with his notes arranged in order, the reviewer 
begins upon his composition. In such a piece of writing it is obviously 
well to intrigue the attention of the prospective reader at the start by 
some remarks of general introduction, to lead him from concerns of his 
own day's routine into a mood in which he can appreciate the essay which 
is to be set before him. Since the book is the product of a certain human 
mind and inevitably bears the marks of its creator's strength or weakness, 
it is also desirable to discover and to state the bare facts, of the author's 
life and the effect which his environment and the circumstances of his 
career were bound to have upon his views and his work. What merits, if 
any, have been ascribed to his work in general? What experience or 
preparation qualified him to undertake the task in hand? Exactly when 
and under what conditions was it written? 

Thus equipped, the student addresses himself to the review, which is 
expected to accomplish two quite different ends. In the first place it is 
expected to furnish bibliographical information about the book, that is, 
not only in the beginning an accurate statement of the title, author, 
date, pagination, etc. (for example Alexayider Hamilton: An Essay 
on American Union. By Frederick S. Oliver. London and New York, 
1917 — 502 pp.), but a setting forth of the plan and scope of the 
work, a clear rehearsal of the main ideas developed and a careful* 
report of the kind of sources and method which the author has apparently 
used. Were the authorities he cites really contemporaneous records of 
the events he here recounts? The seeming formality of such a summary 

[13] 



should not dissuade the reviewer from using whatever art he may possess, 
as an intelligible summary requires not only insight in discerning what 
is of primary importance, but considerable sympathy and facility to ex- 
press in a few written pages the substance of a volume. It is hoped that 
by this practice the student will himself learn to read more intelligently. 

So far his point of view has been inside the book, noting and recording 
its features as a work of scholarship. But this is not all, nor, indeed, has 
it brought into play the highest powers of the mind. The student must 
now summon his faculties of criticism wisely to evaluate what he has con- 
sidered and described. He has indicated in general the author's purpose; 
it is now his function to sit in judgment to decide in how far that purpose 
has been realized. Does the book tell you what you wish to know about 
the subject? Do you find evidence of ill-reasoned organization, i. e., a 
presentation of certain facts in one connection which might more logically 
be presented in another? Is there any material which seems to you ir- 
relevant, or does all serve the general purpose? Does the author's style 
attract or repel the reader? Is there a lack or superfluity of detail, or is 
there just enough to make clear his pictures or his points? Does he offer 
a full narrative or does he presuppose the reader's knowledge of the facts, 
and content himself with comment? Does he seem fair in his interpreta- 
tion of evidence or do his judgments seem unwarranted by the facts he 
cites? Why, if at all, should anyone pay money for this book and spend 
time in reading it? Does it succeed as well as other books you know 
upon this or similar subjects? Considering the mans'- things that men 
and women have to do, is it wise to foster interest in such subjects? To 
whom would you recommend such reading, and why? 

These are not questions that can be answered without thought and in 
thus measuring the book in the larger terms of human experience, the re- 
view will gain a value of its own. There is no need, of course, as reference 
to any number of The Amo-ican Historical Rerieic or various other jour- 
nals will illustrate, for the reviewer to draw a line between description 
and criticism, putting into part one what the book says and into part two 
what is said about it. Rather, as a rule, the two will go side by side to 
attract or warn the general reading public for whom, it is supposed, the 
review is prepared. 

But perhaps these brief and elementary suggestions should not be 
brought to a close without a word of caution. From the nature of this little 
booklet they are intended for students and writers of comparatively small 
experience and it may seem that a critical review is in itself an enter- 
prise of too much dignity for one with such equipment. Respectable criti- 
cism, it is true, will generally come from those who themselves have 
thought long and fruitfully upon the subjects of the works that they dis- 
cuss. Even these with all their qualifications should approach a book 
freshly come to hand with humility and hope, for it may prove a con- 
'tribution well deserving of a welcome. In Milton's phrase, "A good book 
is the precious life-blood of a master spirit, embalmed and treasured up on 
purpose to a life beyond life"; lest the work that he sets out to study 
should prove one of those, no critic can afford to start in flippancy or 

[14] 



captiousness. The exercise we here propose is not intended to make 
literary coxcombs, and the mind should have a reason, sincere and well- 
considered, before each judgment is set down. Do not too jauntily assume 
the role of censor. But, it may readily be admitted, experience shows 
that such counsel is not often necessary. Rather the novice quails before 
the printed page as something with a magic sacredness, and the too, too 
gentle reader forgets that he has rights. Even a great work may fall 
some short of perfection; at least it cannot be immune from shrewd 
analysis to find wherein its merits lie. 



[15] 



LIBRftRY OF CONGRESS 



018 487 070 8 



